The worst part of a trade down will be listening to everyone scream about passing up "playmakers". Personally, I don't see anyone at 4 that is worth that pick most years and is appreciably better than other players you can get later.

The worst part of a trade down will be listening to everyone scream about passing up "playmakers". Personally, I don't see anyone at 4 that is worth that pick most years and is appreciably better than other players you can get later.

I'm all for trading down.

Not to pick a fight, but when, exactly (and how, since we are not active in FA as per "The Plan") do you propose we acquire "playmakers"? Do we not need any? Or will we just get them later? Maybe in the superfantabulous draft of 2014 where every pick is destined for the HOF?

I just do not see how to build a team with mid 1st round picks. By some talking head accounts there are 6 difference making studs in this draft. We desperately need one of those.

Put another way, when does the statute of limitations expire on "the cupboard was bare" excuse? I hoped it was after the 2011 draft. I guess not.

ETA - "Not trading out of the top 10" changes my take a bit. They like a guy that would be a reach at 4 and if he slides to 8 or so they'll try and get him. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is trading to get more picks simply to get more picks.

I don't need to be patient, they're going to be shit forever. - CDT, discussing my favorite NFL team

HEY Fuck You Matt! Why are you always riding people picking fits and shit!?

I assume that included in the 6 playmakers is Blackmon and Richardson. I guess I'm just not as excited about those guys, partly due to the position that they play. I don't want a RB that high, and Blackmon leaves me uninspired in relation to what you would expect a receiver drafted #4 to be.

I guess another guy is Claiborne. I like him but after drafting Haden...I don't know.

It's not that I'm opposed to playmakers. Obviously we need them. But you can't automatically make a guy something you don't think he is just because you draft him #4.

If they think a guy is worth that pick and going to be a stud then by all means take him. I just don't know if I think anyone who is available is that guy. Maybe it's just my own personal RG3 rebound.

I don't want them to not trade down for the sake of not trading down, even if trading down is the best thing...if that makes any sense.

motherscratcher wrote:Basically, if younthink Blackmon is a playmaking stud, pick him at 4. By all means.

But, if you don't think he is, picking him at #4 doesnt turn him into that.

The issue is he isn't. The gap between Blackmon and Floyd (when sober) is negligible. The gap between Blackmon and Wright is a bit bigger but Wright is still a terrific WR.

Same with Richardson. The gap between Richardson and L Miller is wider than the WR gap above, but not so great as that you wouldn't be thrilled with how good Miller is and how much better he is than what ya got.

And Wilson might be in that same neighborhood.

If you need RBs and WRs (and OL) this is your year. Excellent value and talent to be had outside that top ten. If someone wants Claiborne, TRichardson, Kalil, or whomever it is they really want, I'm praying the Browns move back a bit and get a couple more picks and/or use a few of those 4th-5th-6th to move back into 2nd and 3rd for that depth.

Justin Blackmon terrifies me. Bottom line: You only pick WR Top 5 if it is Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson levels of confidence in the player.

You can't pick a god damn cornerback. You can I guess. But you need SO MUCH on offense, it would be lunacy to use a precious #1 pick on D.

Richardson to me has a very low bust % and should be a good back. But #4? In a league with 60% passes? And 10 of last years 15 rushers being smaller backs. Not at #4. No thanks.

Kalil would be my preference of all these guys if on da board.

But EOD, I am ALL ABOUT the trade down this year. Never made more sense. Still get great players with the trade down pick, #22, #37 ... maybe pick up another 4th/5th. And add a #1 next year so we're positioned well to get outbid again to trade up to get next year's unexpected breakout QB.

"It's like dating a woman who hates you so much she will never break up with you, even if you burn down the house every single autumn." ~ Chuck Klosterman on Browns fans relationship with the Browns

But that won't stop every asshole with a Browns hoodie and the dexterity to punch a few numbers into a phone from calling Chuck Fucking Booms and screaming about how Holmgren (and they will mostly say Holmgren) doesnt want playmakers.

It's almost like this:

People don't want Blackmon at 4 because he's a playmakers. Blackmon is a playmaker BECAUSE he was taken at 4.

motherscratcher wrote:HEY Fuck You Matt! Why are you always riding people picking fits and shit!?

I assume that included in the 6 playmakers is Blackmon and Richardson. I guess I'm just not as excited about those guys, partly due to the position that they play. I don't want a RB that high, and Blackmon leaves me uninspired in relation to what you would expect a receiver drafted #4 to be.

I guess another guy is Claiborne. I like him but after drafting Haden...I don't know.

It's not that I'm opposed to playmakers. Obviously we need them. But you can't automatically make a guy something you don't think he is just because you draft him #4.

If they think a guy is worth that pick and going to be a stud then by all means take him. I just don't know if I think anyone who is available is that guy. Maybe it's just my own personal RG3 rebound.

I don't want them to not trade down for the sake of not trading down, even if trading down is the best thing...if that makes any sense.

Everything Lee writes about you is true. Glad you love Browns Brand Football with no playmakers so much, butt munch. There's plenty of PSL's out there for sale. You can take your pick.

Nah, seriously, move down like Heckert says, but not lower than 8. And it MUST net me a 2nd rounder minimum. No day three boolcrud.

If that means I can get the WR, RB, ORT that we MUST obtain and the extra pick allows a flier on Weeden, I'm for it. If it also allows a CB and S prospect earlier than day three, or maybe a decent guard to sit Lavao down, coolio.

But slot me down to pick 20 and draft Jonathan Martin and a slew a meh "playmakers" in rounds 2 and 3 who can be The Next Generation (TM) of Northcutt's, Prentice's, JuJuan's, Andre's, Quincy's, James Johnsons', MoMass', biske's, Hardesty's ..... you get the idea?

No fucking way.

At some point you have to stop listening to the wanna be draftniks who know enough to make them dumb and keep telling you a Hundai Genesis is allllllmost as good as that BMW 5 series and accept that you can't make a Kahuna burger out of Alpo.

Long story short -- have no problem trading down a few slots in the top 10, but you better come out of this with a primo playmaker and you better get something of value YOU ACTUALLY USE in 2012 for it.

Edit - Any comments here are strictly in the sense of broadest brush intension. Not meant to resemble any actually single or duo of actual human beings. Any resemblance is purely coincidental. I've just spent so many years of reading over analysis trying to get me to believe the hype that a sow's ear is indeed a silk purse due to post-season over analysis or a highlight reel that I just am a cynical cuss. I'm talking "Keith Baldwin is just as good as Marty Lyons cause Prothro says so" cynical. Sure you can find playmakers later, and there's always gonna be your Peter Warricks, but the hit rate over the years in round one vs later rounds is beyond refute. There's reasons guys go on day one vs day two or three.

jb wrote:FWIW - I don't think you have to worry about Blackmon, Swerb. He's on record with some very disparaging remarks about the Browns. Can't see that happening.

I hate rewarding this kind of behavior by giving them what they want.

What the Browns should do is announce early on in the process that if you (the draftable player) make any disparaging remarks - either publicly or privately - about the Browns, then they will immediately move you up the boards to ensure that they DO draft you, then send you on crossing routes right at James Harrison every damn play.

swerb wrote:Justin Blackmon terrifies me. Bottom line: You only pick WR Top 5 if it is Larry Fitzgerald or Calvin Johnson levels of confidence in the player.

You can't pick a god damn cornerback. You can I guess. But you need SO MUCH on offense, it would be lunacy to use a precious #1 pick on D.

Richardson to me has a very low bust % and should be a good back. But #4? In a league with 60% passes? And 10 of last years 15 rushers being smaller backs. Not at #4. No thanks.

Kalil would be my preference of all these guys if on da board.

But EOD, I am ALL ABOUT the trade down this year. Never made more sense. Still get great players with the trade down pick, #22, #37 ... maybe pick up another 4th/5th. And add a #1 next year so we're positioned well to get outbid again to trade up to get next year's unexpected breakout QB.

SD:

Blackmon has the change of direction and ability to run routes which make him the perfect pick for this system .( Even though we ave absolute shit to throw him the damn ball )

Heckerts comments were aimed at two teams .

They would like to do bidness with the Rams and net one of those Wasington #1's and entice them to come back up for Blackmon because Kalil will be a Vike , they would normally take a second and an ancillary pick but not after the bad blood dirty laundry issue over RG3 .

If they net the goodies they grab Fannyhill , otherwise they'll seek that #1 from the Dulphins and move down to 8 hoping Richardson dropped with them .

Fire Marshall Bill wrote:Blackmon knows as much about the Browns as FMB does about Rap .

You're right SD....the only thing I know about rap is that you can't spell crap without it...

SD:

Thats a good one but this should set your hair on Fire .

These dummies need to reach for tanneyhill and be done with it .

Then use the number one the next three fuckin years if they have too on QB until they get one .

We have 12 other picks to make up for an early raech on the 20th best player in the draft if he's the top QB on the board after Luck and RG3 , we're forced to reach because these jackasses passed last year in a QB deep draft .

No need to wait until next year to find out we're out of position and are in the same situation just reach now you miserable fuckin Jackasses and have done with it.

So since they missed on RG3 and they claim they were gonna use three #1's if they had been allowed to rebid ( yeah right ) , then let them spend a number one the next three years until you get the one you missed.

If we made it out of RD 1 with Miller, Wright, an extra 3rd and a #1 next year I'm all about it.

One, I don't think you'd get a 1 next yr. out of it. Two, while I might agree that the gap between the WR's is pretty small, I don't for a second buy that for RB. Richardson is the clear top dog, IMHO.

Either way, isn't it time the Browns pick the BEST guy at his position, for once, and not settling for "value?" I do. Even if it's a "reach."

Look, if you guarantee me that either Richardson or Blackmon will drop to 6 or 8, then do it. Two problems, though. One, the Bucs just might take Richardson at 5, with Blackmon going to StL at either 4 or 6. Two, someone trades up with TB or Jax. You cannot be reasonably confident that either guy will drop to you, so, IMHO, you swallow hard, and pick either at 4.

If we made it out of RD 1 with Miller, Wright, an extra 3rd and a #1 next year I'm all about it.

One, I don't think you'd get a 1 next yr. out of it. Two, while I might agree that the gap between the WR's is pretty small, I don't for a second buy that for RB. Richardson is the clear top dog, IMHO.

Either way, isn't it time the Browns pick the BEST guy at his position, for once, and not settling for "value?" I do. Even if it's a "reach."

Look, if you guarantee me that either Richardson or Blackmon will drop to 6 or 8, then do it. Two problems, though. One, the Bucs just might take Richardson at 5, with Blackmon going to StL at either 4 or 6. Two, someone trades up with TB or Jax. You cannot be reasonably confident that either guy will drop to you, so, IMHO, you swallow hard, and pick either at 4.

One, I never said there wasn't a large gap between richardson and Miller. I said I'd be thrilled with Miller and Wright.

Two, If the Browns traded back into Miller type range, it absolutely brings a #1 and then some to do it.

CleSportsTruth wrote:Either way, isn't it time the Browns pick the BEST guy at his position, for once, and not settling for "value?"

The Browns got the #1 QB prospect in Couch, #1 DE prospect in the Quiet Storm, #1 WR prospect in Braylon, the #1 Tackle in Thomas, #1 TE in Winslow, #1 CB in Haden, and a couple others you could also argue were the top rated prospects at their position. So lets not pretend that trading down happens more than it really does.

The clear BPA on offense is Richardson, a RB. This is important because if you are asking me whether I feel the Browns just HAVE to take the best player at THAT position just “because” I’m going to say no, absolutely no.

You know what I’d rather have? Another 1st round Bullet for next year so we can spend it moving up to take an elite talent at a position that matters more than running back. I wish that was available this year at 4, I wish we’d have been able to move up for Griffen but such is life, we lost that fight. Doesn’t mean I’m going to get punchdrunk and forget that Elite RB’s don’t get you all that much in this league, or that Blackmon isn’t close to the prospect that Green and Jones were last year.

So if someone else in the teens that already has that Qb or is Mike Ditka stupid wants to give me a #1 and then some to move on down and grab Miller instead, I’ll do it and not blink.

If I’m forced to stick I’ll begrudgingly take Richardson knowing that I got a great player. Not a horrible consolation prize and gets the short sighted off my back but doesn’t make getting the QB you need much easier.

If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

Hikohadon wrote:If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

Hikohadon wrote:If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

SD:

That would make picking Fannyhill a tolerably less reach when you add in the cherry and net two fer one.

One of their #1's next year is the ticket , i like it better than DC's #2 this year , a our 22 already leaves us in good shape .

Hikohadon wrote:If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

"I don't think they're building chemical weapons in Berea. But they might be. I can't say for sure."Chuck Klosterman

Hikohadon wrote:If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

SD:

Thats banking a lot on a DE whose work ethic supposedly makes Big money look like lou the handi man.

Govbarney wrote:I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

The brilliance of the Browns is that they always have so many holes, they can afford to draft any number of positions. Its not like they are just a WR or a CB away from being a playoff team. If so, they'd have to take a WR or CB at #4. But when you can draft a WR, CB, QB, RB, or LB, then you can trade down and still plug a hole.

This team has been well designed to be built through the draft. By letting talent constantly leave, and rarely bringing talent in, they create so many holes that they never have to actually use a high draft pick. Rather they can trade down for more picks. Masterful. Brilliant.

Commodore Perry wrote:This team has been well designed to be built through the draft. By letting talent constantly leave, and rarely bringing talent in, they create so many holes that they never have to actually use a high draft pick. Rather they can trade down for more picks. Masterful. Brilliant.

Hikohadon wrote:If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

Commodore Perry wrote:This team has been well designed to be built through the draft. By letting talent constantly leave, and rarely bringing talent in, they create so many holes that they never have to actually use a high draft pick. Rather they can trade down for more picks. Masterful. Brilliant.

Hikohadon wrote:If the Browns trade down to 8 and both Blackmon & Richardson are gone, take Coples and be done with it. Take a WR with the 22. Take a RB with the 37.

EDIT - Fisher says the Rams open to trading up to #4, presumably to get Blackmon.

What can you squeeze out of STL for that trade? They've got a surplus of 1's coming up, maybe you can get one of those? Or maybe Washington's 2 from this year (that's a pretty high 2)? That would give them 6, 22, 37, and 39 in this draft. In theory, 4 new starters.

I agree build a Defense that can compete in a division with 2 A+ Defenses, and 1 B+ Defense. You add Couples and in a year or two your looking at the best front four in the Division, possibly the conference. I keep thinking back to the Giants SB run, and I believe it was there D-line which gave them a edge over the competition and made up for some other shortcomings. That D-line was able make two future "franchise" Hall of Fame QBs (Rogers & Brady) look really human, and in my eyes still showed that good Defense will still more often then not beat good offense.

Almost everyone will freak out initially. Someone will claim that he's "done" with the Browns. Someone will joke that Tannehill's agent must be LaMonte.

A few days will go by.

Most people will rebound from the disappointment and reason "Well, for better or for worse, he's the QB of the future around here. Guess we'll have to wait and see if maybe he's worth a squirt of piss."

Hikohadon wrote:Trading down to take Tannehill will go something like this:

Almost everyone will freak out initially. Someone will claim that he's "done" with the Browns. Someone will joke that Tannehill's agent must be LaMonte.

A few days will go by.

Most people will rebound from the disappointment and reason "Well, for better or for worse, he's the QB of the future around here. Guess we'll have to wait and see if maybe he's worth a squirt of piss."

By Training Camp, yes, Tannehill will have his camp too.

Sounds eerily accurate - you aren't the male precog from Minority Report by any chance, are you?